Cannabidiol (CBD) in cannabis-infused edibles in Malta

Abstract

After Malta’s legalisation for the recreational use of cannabis in 2021, the local market has seen an increase in the accessibility of edibles in cannabis shops. While the level of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is permitted if it does not exceed 0.2 percent, there is no set limit on the amount of cannabidiol (CBD) permitted in recreational products. The rising demand, has led to this in-depth investigation, to ensure consumer safety and promote transparency, in the labelling of CBD edibles. Thus, this study aimed mainly to investigate the presence or absence of CBD in edibles, and to then compare it with the labelling of the samples. The technique used to detect CBD and any other additional components in edibles, was gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS). Samples of six different edibles (gummies, chocolates, sleep candies, a muffin, and cookies) were bought from a local shop. The samples underwent several preparatory procedures, including crushing, methanol dilution, vortexing, sonication, and filtration, along with supplementary steps of centrifugation, dilution, and vortexing prior to the filtration of gelatinous edibles (sample 6). These preparatory procedures were done to ensure that samples were well prepared, before the analysis by the GC/MS. The analysis uncovered significant inconsistencies in the labelling precision of CBD edibles. While four of the six samples contained CBD, Sample 2 was mislabelled, as it contained CBDA instead of CBD due to incomplete decarboxylation, highlighting misleading labelling practices. Sample 3 was particularly problematic due to its packaging, which failed to disclose the presence of CBD and Δ9-THCH, and omitted caffeine, thereby raising concerns regarding regulatory compliance. Similarly, Sample 5 omitted both CBN and CBD from its ingredient list, implying the potential presence of CBD, indirectly through the labelled “organic hemp extract”. Caffeine was also detected in sample 4 without appropriate disclosure. Moreover, sample 4 was marketed by sellers as a CBD product, but it lacked CBD. These findings underscore a deficiency in transparency and the possible dangers linked to mislabelling. Samples 1 and 6 exhibited precise CBD labelling, signifying their reliability. This study emphasises the necessity for more stringent regulations and standardised practices within the commercial cannabis sector, particularly concerning accurate labelling. This research reveals significant consumer safety concerns, highlighting the need for regulatory measures to ensure quality and transparency in products, to ultimately protect the public’s health.